Jump to:

In versions of NAADSM prior to 3.2, it was not possible to have a false positive detection. As a result, it was possible to use the term "detected unit" as shorthand for "detected infected unit". The term "detected unit" is used in several output definitions.

With the release of NAADSM 3.2, and continuing in subsequent planned versions, it is possible to have false-positive detections. Consequently, some output definitions are no longer entirely precise. For example, the output detOccurred in NAADSM 3.1 is defined as "Number of iterations in which infected units were detected". In NAADSM 3.2, this output might be more correctly defined as "Number of iterations in which detection of an apparently infected unit occurred".

I suggest that the Development Team come up with a consistent, precise way to clearly define such outputs. Possibilities might include "apparently infected and detected" or "detected-infected".

Several additional examples are shown below. Once the Team has come up with precise wording that it is happy with, the programmers can update output definitions accordingly.

Samples

vaccURing. CURRENT DEFINITION: Number of units vaccinated in rings around detected-infected units over the course of an iteration. PROPOSED NEW DEFINITION: Number of units vaccinated in rings around apparently infected and detected units over the course of an iteration.

firstDetection. CURRENT DEFINITION: Day of first detection of an infected unit in the specified iteration. PROPOSED NEW DEFINITION: Day of first detection of an apparently infected unit in the specified iteration.